Sign in
in
   
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle

About Me

I am a co-founder of Notches, an early stage startup currently based in NYC. We are building a free, open reviews network that anyone can participate in and anyone can build on top of. You can find out more on our official blog.

Read more about my background.

Connect with me on...

Recent Readers

Flickr Photos

 

Browse by Tags

All Tags » Law » Apple (RSS)
  • How to buy an unlocked iPhone (and thoughts on the iPod Touch)

    Go to Germany and bring $1,500 with you (well, more if the dollar keeps slipping and you don't go soon). T-Mobile will be selling an unlocked, contract-less iPhone as a result of a German court ruling . T-Mobile said Wednesday that it will sell the iPhone in Germany without a contract, complying with a court injunction against it. In addition, it will unlock any phone bought since November 19 -- the date of the ruling -- at no charge, so that the device can be used with other carriers. However, the company has asked the courts to clarify the injunction so it may change its offer to consumers based upon that. Consumers will gain the option to purchase the device without the two year contract for €999, or about $1,478 USD. In all cases, contract or not, T-Mobile will unlock any iPhone purchased after the ruling. The process is apparently different in Germany than it is here in the US. American consumers may purchase the iPhone sans contract for a flat price of $399, whereas in Germany...
    Posted Nov 27 2007, 06:18 AM by Tim with | with 2 comment(s)
    Filed under: , , ,
  • Was DRM-free music an Apple innovation?

    Some people have tried to paint the recent announcement by Apple as example of Apple innovating and Microsoft following . Headlines like " Microsoft changes tune on selling DRM-free songs " are simply misleading - none of the technology companies truly wanted DRM, but they were a necessary evil in selling music that they did not own. As I've discussing in previous posts , Microsoft, Real Networks, and Yahoo! were all instrumental in the anti-DRM movement. Most labels seem to get it - these decisions and stratregy are more often coming from the corporate parents, not the labels themselves. In fact, Gates criticized DRM months before Jobs' manifesto a month ago, and EMI had been reportedly been considering releasing DRM-free tracks in MP3 format for awhile. This initially-exclusive deal with EMI simply demonstrates Apple's significant marketshare for purchased music and influence in the market. The mere fact that Apple was lucky and/or powerful enough to convince a major label to do something...
  • Steve Jobs and Apple telling half-truths about DRM

    This has already been covered ad nasuem , but I thought I should mention Apple's denouncement of DRM last week. Steve Jobs summarily dismissed Apple's DRM as a result of demands from the record labels. Since Apple does not own or control any music itself, it must license the rights to distribute music from others, primarily the “big four” music companies: Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI. These four companies control the distribution of over 70% of the world’s music. When Apple approached these companies to license their music to distribute legally over the Internet, they were extremely cautious and required Apple to protect their music from being illegally copied. The solution was to create a DRM system, which envelopes each song purchased from the iTunes store in special and secret software so that it cannot be played on unauthorized devices. I have no doubt that the record labels are concerned with putting unprotected music out there, but Apple is also in no rush to do away with DRM...